Some of the most heinous crimes in recent memory have been carried out, not by politically motivated foreign operatives, says Tom Matlack, founder of The Good Men Project, but by young men. Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, James Eagan Holmes, the Tsarnaev brothers -- each fit this category. Matlack says that “frustration and isolation” is typical in young men these days, and that the issue of “an increasing alienation of an entire gender” needs to be addressed. Do you agree with his assessment?

Some of the most heinous crimes in recent memory have been carried out, not by politically motivated foreign operatives, says Tom Matlack, founder of The Good Men Project, but by young men. Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, James Eagan Holmes, the Tsarnaev brothers -- each fit this category. Matlack says that “frustration and isolation” is typical in young men these days, and that the issue of “an increasing alienation of an entire gender” needs to be addressed. Do you agree with his assessment?

Some of the most heinous crimes in recent memory have been carried out, not by politically motivated foreign operatives, says Tom Matlack, founder of The Good Men Project, but by young men. Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, James Eagan Holmes, the Tsarnaev brothers -- each fit this category. Matlack says that “frustration and isolation” is typical in young men these days, and that the issue of “an increasing alienation of an entire gender” needs to be addressed. Do you agree with his assessment?

What is up with the byline on that site? "Thinking that Matters"--well, if that isn't elitist privilege...

I don't understand this comment. What exactly is elitist or privileged about it?

_________________A whole lot of access and privilege goes into being sanctimonious pricks J-DubDessert is currently a big bowl of sanctimonious, passive aggressive vegan enduced boak. FezzaYou people are way less funny than Pandacookie. Sucks to be you.-interrobang?!

Sorry--didn't mean to let that one slip by without context (sometimes forget I'm not talking to people who know me in real life).

I already hold a lot of disdain for the Good Men Project (the reasons for which I believe were discussed several pages upthread--although not by me)...so I fully admit that I expected to disagree with the framing of the article, if not the premise itself.

Yes, notions of masculinity *do* play into violence and in both direct and indirect ways, boys are expected to equate aggression with masculinity. I'm not disagreeing with that.

Just given what I know of the GMP, I'm extrapolating a pretty heavy insinuation in this article that men are slipping because of their victimization by a "shift in roles", ergo, they're become victim to the absence of patriarchy. That's probably a pretty far reach (or, maybe not), but it was an impulsive comment. I need to comb through the article a couple more times before I can articulate in clearer terms what's wrong with it.

As far as my comment about the byline goes--there wasn't anything to read beyond that. I thought it was gauche--"thinking that matters" seems a little self-congratulatory. But again, I'm projecting my disdain for the GMP--I also didn't realize that Tom Matlack isn't the creator of that website.

In other words, I'm cranky. Don't mind me.

_________________"So often I wish Adam were a real boy." - interrobang?!"If he was you'd hear him farting at the back of your yoga class." - 8ball

This is pretty dumb because it's from a TV show, but it bothered me to no end! On the last episode of Castle, Castle is playing video games and Beckett comes into the room in just a shirt acting all sexy and gets really mad when Castle is more interested in his video game than her and then it's this whole big fight about it. I HATE that shiitake so much! If a dude would rather do something than have sex with a woman at the drop of a hat there is clearly something wrong with him? He should just dismiss any activity he's doing because OMG SEX!!!!? ugh. If it was reversed and Beckett was doing something she liked and Castle was like "hey come have sex with me right now," he'd still be the asparagus in that situation. They build the show around Beckett being a super tough cop, but she acts super stereotypically in her relationship with Castle. I don't buy it. Bad writing, I think.

_________________I am not a troll. I am TELLING YOU THE ******GOD'S TRUTH****** AND YOU JUST DON'T WANT THE HEAR IT DO YOU?

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 8:03 pmPosts: 6308Location: The State Of No R's

So this is kind of a rant and an asking for advice. I have to work with these two crazy sexist guys. I've reported the one before, someone else has reported him before and I know that others have, as well. He doesn't work for the place that I work so his boss isn't my boss and his boss doesn't work at my store, he's a third party. All that my bosses can do is take down a report and send it to his boss and hope that they follow up with him and/or take some action. So for now at least, I need to be able to work with him. Technically I don't need to really talk to him, I just need him to communicate various things with me from time to time and he can be helpful at work but then when he starts talking about personal stuff or he asks me personal questions is where we get into the murky water. I try to limit my conversations with him to only various subjects and to keep them short but I've noticed lately that he's been getting more and more bold with what he says to me. Today it ended up with me telling him that he's an awful, awful, horrible person and we both said that we were going to stop talking about the subject. I just want to be able to work well and comfortably. How would everyone in this thread handle a situation like this?

_________________"...anarchists only want to burn cars and punch cops."- nickvicious"We'll be eating our own words 30 years from now when we're demanding our legislators outlaw aerosol-based cyber dildo-wielding death holograms."- Brian

Sometimes people who are dishing it out feel uncomfortable with I stop smiling and just kind of look at them and take a deep breath then let it out during the eye contact. Sounds like a one-time conversation with this person won't do the trick, but maybe a heart-to-heart pointing out the next time something sexist is said, that it's sexist. Then the next time, a reminder, like hey, remember a million years ago when we talked about this? That's pretty much what I do, sometimes it works. Never with people I work with though, that's harder.

_________________You know what would probably be a more effective ritual? Telling the person who you want to shut up, "You better not talk or we'll pound you." -Footface

Some of the most heinous crimes in recent memory have been carried out, not by politically motivated foreign operatives, says Tom Matlack, founder of The Good Men Project, but by young men. Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, James Eagan Holmes, the Tsarnaev brothers -- each fit this category. Matlack says that “frustration and isolation” is typical in young men these days, and that the issue of “an increasing alienation of an entire gender” needs to be addressed. Do you agree with his assessment?

I agree with tingle that boys *are* gendered to be emotionally castrated, aggressive, but they're leaving out the fact that boys are raised also to feel entitled to being like that. I don't think its feminism's fault or even changing roles, I think its us holding onto awful patriarchal beliefs and raising boys that way, even though the world is less and less likely to want to cater to them.

Yeah, they're all guys, but they're also white guys from middle to upper-class incomes. They have very little, realisticly, to complain about. The author very much avoids the issue of race even though he brings up prison systems (in which men of colour are disproportionately represented and more likely to receive harsher sentences than their white counterparts), and doesn't acknowledge that of men who are oppressed and disenfranchised, why aren't more mass murderers men of colour?

I think it has something to do with masculinity, but it also has an awful lot to do with class and race.

Mr. Shankly wrote:

So this is kind of a rant and an asking for advice. I have to work with these two crazy sexist guys. I've reported the one before, someone else has reported him before and I know that others have, as well. He doesn't work for the place that I work so his boss isn't my boss and his boss doesn't work at my store, he's a third party. All that my bosses can do is take down a report and send it to his boss and hope that they follow up with him and/or take some action. So for now at least, I need to be able to work with him. Technically I don't need to really talk to him, I just need him to communicate various things with me from time to time and he can be helpful at work but then when he starts talking about personal stuff or he asks me personal questions is where we get into the murky water. I try to limit my conversations with him to only various subjects and to keep them short but I've noticed lately that he's been getting more and more bold with what he says to me. Today it ended up with me telling him that he's an awful, awful, horrible person and we both said that we were going to stop talking about the subject. I just want to be able to work well and comfortably. How would everyone in this thread handle a situation like this?

I'd just flat out tell him that if he keeps it up, I'll keep reporting until he's fired. It sucks but every time I've had problems with harassment at work, you basically have to treat them like children. Doesn't always work though, when I worked at a Wendy's the supervisor who kept harassing me was the nephew of the general manager, so he never got fired, even though he caused a lot of damage to the store, a coworker's wedding ring (slammed her finger in the window) and made another coworker seriously ill when he put hot sauce in her drinking straw. Maybe just ask your boss to be more stern when talking to his boss, or ask his boss for a replacement because he's a walking HR case?

_________________I was really surprised the first time I saw a penis. After those banana tutorials, I was expecting something so different. -Tofulish

So this is kind of a rant and an asking for advice. I have to work with these two crazy sexist guys. I've reported the one before, someone else has reported him before and I know that others have, as well. He doesn't work for the place that I work so his boss isn't my boss and his boss doesn't work at my store, he's a third party. All that my bosses can do is take down a report and send it to his boss and hope that they follow up with him and/or take some action. So for now at least, I need to be able to work with him. Technically I don't need to really talk to him, I just need him to communicate various things with me from time to time and he can be helpful at work but then when he starts talking about personal stuff or he asks me personal questions is where we get into the murky water. I try to limit my conversations with him to only various subjects and to keep them short but I've noticed lately that he's been getting more and more bold with what he says to me. Today it ended up with me telling him that he's an awful, awful, horrible person and we both said that we were going to stop talking about the subject. I just want to be able to work well and comfortably. How would everyone in this thread handle a situation like this?

What about just saying, "That's not an acceptable thing to say. I'm done with this conversation now," and walking away. Lather, rinse, repeat. Make sure you do it the first time he says something sexist in a conversation so you are sending a clear message of 0 tolerance and he can't cry mixed messages. I don't know if that would work but I had to do something similar with my ILs telling racist jokes. After a few "well that was racist" and no laughter, they stopped. They think I'm a total bisque, but that's not my problem.

That's tough, Mr. Shankly. I wish I had some advice. Do you think you'd feel OK being confrontational? I know I let some things slide that bother me, just because it's a work relationship, and I don't want to make waves. It's nothing too bad though maybe? I don't know. I have a vendor that always calls me "young lady" and it feels patronizing. I've been labeled sensitive, too 'PC,' or just a pain in the asparagus so often that it makes me hesitant as well. Basically I challenge the feminism in my life, it seems.

_________________I would eat Dr. Cow pocket cheese in a second. I would eat it if you hid it under your hat, or in your backpack, but not if it was in your shoe. That's where I draw the line. -allularpunk

A recently-added FB friend (a guy I knew in high school) keeps posting about "the Jills" and it took me a while to realize he was talking about the Buffalo Bills and thinks it's funny to refer to them as the Jills because they (apparently)* play badly. Hahaha... let's insult our local team by calling them by the name of their cheerleading squad. Ha ha ha... so funny.

*I say "apparently" because I don't give two shiitakes about football and have no idea which teams suck.

(Add this to his post about how sorry he is that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was caught because now the American taxpayer was going to have to pay for his defence, and how he likes Europe "except for the politics for the most part", and I think he's heading for either a hiding or a defriending pretty darned soon.)

_________________I ate the shiitake out of inappropriateness. - Hollie

I watched Law & Order SVU, which did an episode called "Girl Dishonored" about a series of rapes at a college campus covered up by the campus police and college deans. And I thought they more or less did a good job, but something didn't sit right with me. And then I read one of the Amherst survivor's pieces on it, and it made sense.

Quote:

Granted, the episode was powerful and the writers did a good job squishing all of my survivor friends’ and my stories together to make a whole, but at what cost? I feel like I’ve been stolen from, cheated out of the chance to tell them how the story should go. My main problem was the episode’s ending, with disgustingly optimistic tone, for, as I mentioned earlier, the corrupt school officials and rapists are brought to trial and Renee decides to return to school.

Yes, Survivors have been more vocal than we have in years and have founded collectives to remind ourselves that we’re not alone and can keep fighting.

No, the rapists are not always brought to trial, and, if they are, they are not necessarily found guilty or given sentences that are equitable to their crimes.

No, almost all school officials don’t resign, even if they’ve been found guilty of covering up sexual assaults.

Survivors often end up between the two extremes of Lindsey and Renee, realizing that you’re not broken and that life can continue is a hard fought battle, that SVU only briefly touched upon.

And no, the local police do not come running to the rescue to save the day.

Crime shows capitalize off of human suffering and the firm knowledge that other people love being reminded that “at least you’re not this person, so your life’s pretty great.” There is no way to eradicate such shows, but I do believe that NBC and SVU have a responsibility to give back to Survivors after they decided to borrow our stories.

That episode was almost unwatchable. I did really like the mixed group holding up signs at the end, though. When I was in charge of organizing Take Back the Night on my campus (where there were also an alarming number of rapes and a surprisingly high number of stranger rapes on or near campus, too), we had a little group of guys who always participated, but it was hard to rope in any more. They didn't want to be associated with a bunch of feminists.

Some of the most heinous crimes in recent memory have been carried out, not by politically motivated foreign operatives, says Tom Matlack, founder of The Good Men Project, but by young men. Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, James Eagan Holmes, the Tsarnaev brothers -- each fit this category. Matlack says that “frustration and isolation” is typical in young men these days, and that the issue of “an increasing alienation of an entire gender” needs to be addressed. Do you agree with his assessment?

An increasing alienation of all people I think is the problem right now the public in the USA is facing. Not men, not because they have shifting roles which supposedly leave them no outlet for their "manly rage" or whatever, but all people. I feel like most of my peers feel isolated, either by the long hours they work due to low wages and necessity to survive, or because they don't see people in person as much as online which is not a substitue for human interaction. I agree with this statement but i know its not limited by gender, and not an excuse.

I have a friend who constantly says feminism leads to misandry. I don't know what to say.

Do they have reasons or are they just trying to be provocative?

_________________A whole lot of access and privilege goes into being sanctimonious pricks J-DubDessert is currently a big bowl of sanctimonious, passive aggressive vegan enduced boak. FezzaYou people are way less funny than Pandacookie. Sucks to be you.-interrobang?!

I have a friend who constantly says feminism leads to misandry. I don't know what to say.

Do they have reasons or are they just trying to be provocative?

A little bit of both, I think. They genuinely believe that even the word feminism is sexist and it becomes one of those conversations where I just change the subject because I don't think it really matters what I say. Then I get really frustrated.

You may ask I talk to this person. They are infuriating, so I ask myself this a lot.